Comments on: Movie Activism

By: FunkyBlue

FunkyBlue — Tue, 31 Dec 2002 19:31:37 +0000

Ok, anyone can pick apart any movie derived from a book and see how many places a fan can be disappointed by the movie. Things like “There were no elves at the battle of Helm’s Deep” or “ince when did Gimli become comic relief?” I didn’t see a lot of people rag down Harry Potter for the things they changed in the films.

Do you think Spider-Man was true to the books? They re-wrote a Gwen Stacey storyline and used M.J. (And yes, I’m a comic geek… Was I disappointed? No. You can’t expect a movie to be perfect to match everyone’s interpretation of a book.

I don’t see a problem with taking some artistic liberties like this for two reasons:

1. If Peter Jackson were going to make a total by the book representation in every shape and form (and face it, this will never happen in Hollywood, you would have three movies that are about 32 hours long each without intermissions. For a series this detailed and lenghty, you have to make some modifications and mold them a bit differently to move the plotline across the three films and still fit it into 3 3-hour increments. In this aspect, I think P.J. has done a job Oscar worthy in and of itself for that alone.

2. For me, TTT was especially hard to muddle through when I last read the trilogy. Of the three books, it was the least appetizing to read. I’m not the only one. Even P.J. himself said he had trouble trying to keep this episode going all the way through. In the end, I like this part the best and expect more from ROtK. If he can make me like the middle of this series, Ill forgive the minor changes.

If I wanted a movie that was the book, I’d just read the book and imagine the whole thing.

By: J.D.

J.D. — Tue, 31 Dec 2002 18:09:31 +0000

I think that it’s likely Return of the Kings could see some major award action next year, as a kind of reward for the overall merits of the trilogy. And I’ll admit, despite the quibbles I have with it, Peter Jackson’s films (thus far) are an impressive work!

By: Rengirl

Rengirl — Tue, 31 Dec 2002 15:28:59 +0000

I agree with Jen. While I have yet to see Gangs of New York, I am still very impressed with Jackson. He has a dedication and motivation that I have never seen and he is definitely the star here. He better at the very least win Best Director.

By: jen

jen — Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:59:58 +0000

Gangs isn’tno, bt mark my words it’llget it, both it and Rings have been nomiated for best director and film for the globes, and thats a pretty good sign of whats goign to see a oscar nom.

It’s, or somethign equally lameass is goign to win.

pisses me off.

By: J.D.

J.D. — Tue, 31 Dec 2002 14:10:14 +0000

Okay, Jen, as much as I like your weblog and as much as I like The Lord of the Rings, I’ve gotta disagree with you on this one.

First of all: have you even seen Gangs of New York? It’s not best picture material, not by a long shot. (But then what do I know? Both Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind won and I dind’t think they were worthy.)

Secondly: The Two Towers is not a great movie. It’s certainly not a bad film, but it’s not as good as Fellowship and, in fact, has some severe flaws. I’ve complained about the film in my weblog if you’re curious what someone might find wrong with it.

Lastly: there are a whole slew of high-quality end-of-the-year releases just dying for Best Picture recognition. Has anyone even seen them all yet?

Now I’ve got to get back to work so I can get out of here early to go see Two Towers again.